Premium
The behavior of mastoidectomy cavities following modified radical mastoidectomy
Author(s) -
Thiel Gundula,
Rutka John A.,
Pothier David D.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
the laryngoscope
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1531-4995
pISSN - 0023-852X
DOI - 10.1002/lary.24610
Subject(s) - medicine , mastoidectomy , interquartile range , surgery , cholesteatoma , debridement (dental) , retrospective cohort study , otologic surgical procedures , middle ear
Objectives/Hypothesis An analysis of the frequency and intensity of postoperative aftercare required for modified radical mastoidectomy (MRM) and patterns of healing in the postoperative period. Study Design A retrospective review of all primary modified radical mastoidectomies carried out for cholesteatoma under the care of the senior author between the years of 2004 and 2009 with minimum follow‐up of 2 years. Methods The time and number of interventions required to achieve a stable and dry mastoid cavity were collected. Cross‐sectional and longitudinal analysis of the behavior of the cavities was carried out. Results Overall, 73 cases (71 patients) were identified. Patients were followed up for a median of 45.7 months (interquartile range, 31.8–70.5). After initial debridement, most cavities settled rapidly, but this was not always predictable, with a large proportion requiring further clinical intervention after the cavity was stable, sometimes for prolonged periods of time. At the time of analysis, 73% had achieved a stable cavity, 17 (23%) still required attention (nine for wax removal and eight for debridement); two were lost to follow‐up. No revision surgeries were required. At 6 months, 36% of cavities were settled, 42% at 1 year, 53% at 18 months, and 62% at 2 years. After two standard postoperative visits, a total of 632 visits were made by these patients. Conclusions Following MRM, the majority of patients achieve a dry, self‐cleaning mastoid cavity. This might require periods of intense care interspersed with periods of quiescence. These results allow the benefits of this procedure to be put in the context of the entire patient journey. Level of Evidence 4. Laryngoscope 124:2380–2385, 2014